Balta1701

Happy Birthday to the van-driver!

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 02:58 PM) C Lee is an FA next year correct? If he makes it to that period, I wouldnt be surprised to see him with the flubs. I still expect him to wind up with the Yankees, with Matsui moving to right to take over the position of Sheffield, whose contract ends and who seems like he's approaching retirement age there. Although Anaheim isn't a bad idea for him either, given how bad it looks like Anderson has dropped off. And there's certian to be a few others at the table, just a question of how much they want to pay for a power hitting left fielder.

QUOTE(daa84 @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 02:06 PM) that brings us to 22, not 21. it sounds like ozzie will carry 12, which i frankly dont agree with. Id rather have a 14th position player who can contribute by pinch running late in the game than a 12th pitcher who is only gonna get into 9-1 games. but if i had to guess ozzie is gonna have 12 pitchers, so ill say borchard makes it, unless they trade him. munoz will be out there and i guess baj. Just a guess though...im not sure why we signed grieve...isnt he just gload without as good of contact, and borchard without the power? One of the nice things about picking up a guy like Machowiak to go along with a guy like Pablo is that each of them can play ALL over the diamond, and if we need to pinch run with a guy like Pablo, then we still have Mack and probably another outfielder on the bench. It's also very nice to be in the AL, because you don't deplete your bench early by pinch hitting for the pitcher. So, we're able to run with 12 pitchers, which even if 1 guy just works junk "The game's already lost" innings, keeps more people fresh.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 02:18 PM) As for the work itself he essentially demonstrated characteristics of "strong" selection on magnitudes millions of times greater than other mammals. If it comforts you into believing that was a random hapistance resulting from man's history of survival then so be it. This is simply wrong, and there's no way around it being wrong. It is not only wrong, but it is completely wrong. From Prof. Lahn's page: So, for those who haven't a clue what that means, here's some layman's terms. They examined the rate of mutation of certain genes in humans and used rodents as a control group. In both cases, there are some proteins which do not change at all when a mutation occurs in the genes which code for that protein. That gives a background rate of mutation adoption - if there is no change in a protein, then the only thing which governs whether or not a mutation will be adopted is pure random probability. If I have a protein that looks the same if it is coded by sequence A or B, then it's just random chance which one will be adopted. Therefore, this number gives us a background rate at which any random mutation will be adopted. Then, if you look at changes which do affect the proteins and compare that to the background rate, you can get a measure of how strong a selective pressure there is. The more strongly a trait is selected for, the more strongly and more rapidly it will be adopted as the more fit individuals take over a population. First of all...a 50% increase is slightly different from the many thousands of times difference you're claiming. Secondly...yes, humanity is a "priveledged species" in 1 sense...in the sense that humanity evolved in a situation where there was a very strong selective pressure towards the development of a more advanced brain. There is nothing designed about it, nothing religious about it, nothing done by Jesus. The process is exactly the same one we're talking about. Random mutations acted upon by selective pressures. I think that almost anyone here can understand why there might be a selective pressure which would drive the body towards the evolution of a larger brain. The evolution of better tools, the evolution of better communication both come to mind immediately. Prof. Lahn is not saying, despite what you contend, that humanity is special in any sense beyond the fact that we faced a selective driving force towards the large brains that we have today which was not experienced by any other creature currently on earth, which isn't that surprising since, well, there are very few other rodents currently capable of building computers.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 02:18 PM) We are living in the computer age. Next comes the cyborg age. Then after that comes the synthetic life age. Selection isn't at work there. We are. Please share your time machine with me when it's available for a moment. I'd love to check on a few stocks next week.

QUOTE(AirScott @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 02:14 PM) obviously the reffing from last night was still fresh in people's minds, because the NBA's reffing is by far the worst...and I'd bet very few of these voters could make a slightly educated judgement on NHL refs. some games are officiated worse than others, but some of the calls people are b****ing about (such as Woody Paige, who's a complete windbag if you ask me) aren't really that inexcusable. in the first replay it was still difficult to tell if anybody got a hand on Hasselbeck, and I still think Darrell Jackson did push off. If you couldn't see the guy getting a hand on hasselbeck, I'm amazed you could see Jackson even touch the DB. Hasselbeck had his shirt clearly grabbed on the way down. I'll grant it was only obvious from 1 angle, but from that angle it was incredibly obvious. Had the refs not overturned that call...that'd have been enough for me to say they were bought off. Because they did overturn it, I just think they stank.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 01:29 PM) If the Brewers manage to swing Carlos for a decent starting pitcher (preferably a lefty) they will win the NL Central next year. Hell, even if they don't trade Carlos I think they have a hell of a chance. This team is really starting to grow on me. I sat here reading your post thinking..."Who out there with some cash could/should be in the market for an outfield bat this year, and do they have pitching to trade"? Immediately, my head spat out: Why not Anaheim? If they want to make a run at that division this year they need another bat, they're pretty close to signing Weaver so they may have an extra arm, and if the Brewers didn't ask for Ervin Santana, they might be able to do something there. The Angels would also have the money to resign CLee if they wanted to.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 01:31 PM) To answer your question here's a good site: http://www.sciencedaily.com/ Given your supposed credentials you should be able to find a source or a link to a source that will either confirm or reject any position. If you are open-minded then you should be capable of finding information serving as pro's on both sides of the issue. Not when there's no information on 1 side to find. I could still probably find 1-2 actual Ph.D's in geology who don't believe in plate tectonics. That doesn't mean they're right, and it doesn't mean they're publishing. Sending me to a science news aggregator is one hell of a pass on my challenge to provide your sources. Do you expect me to look through every research article published today? This week? The last 3 months? The last 5 years?

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 01:34 PM) It wasn't the Democrats who leaked this story, it was an NSA whistleblower. But I'm sure he's a Democrat too. Actually, it was quite a few of them. The NYT held onto that story for months, and heard the same thing over and over again from people who knew the details of the program.

QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 01:28 PM) Drew Gooden to the Bulls? Here's the article. http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives..._a_gooden_deal/ Well, I can't say I've seen him play, but it probably wouldn't hurt the Bulls to trade some of that backcourt depth for some more strength inside, even though we'd basically be running with 2 power forwards instead of a PF and a Center. And giving up Duhon would mean Gordon would be getting more playing time.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 01:22 PM) Oh, come on. The Democrats and "liberals" did that themselves by disclosing this program if you want to be technical. But I'm sure they're heros for standing up against our DICKtator president, right? Huh? The Democrats in the government conducted an orchestrated, covert plan to engage in illegal propaganda by disclosing the program? Then what the hell happened when Mr. Bush came out the next day, gave more details about the thing, and proudly said yes I'm doing it and FU! (hence, the day that this thread was started and it became something more than a report in the NYT)

ESPN.com finally flipped to cover mainly the officiating. This piece by Bayless hits on the refs, and this Michael Smith piece has been up all morning. But as usual...the interesting stuff is in The Poll Man, saying the NFL has worse officials than the NBA...that's one heck of an insult.

Link with video.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 12:39 PM) I agree, but who would you say are the other two? Well, that's a bit of an odd question IMO, because what do you do in placed like LAA for example, where you have a guy in the dugout who may in many cases actually call some of the pitches? Or in places where some pitchers shake off a lot of pitches and call some of their own games? If I had to come up with another one, I'd say IRod may be up on that list - the Marlins were certainly a lot better throwing to him than without him.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 12:24 PM) It was a joke. The "supposed" worst team in the AFC beat the best team in the NFC. I'm sorry that you're still too busy crying about the officiating to laugh. So wait, the Texans beat the Seahawks?

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 11:40 AM) While I agree we have too much creationist thinking in the current ID society that does not change the fact that the base question of ID asks a simple question: Which is more probable? A random generator function at the heart of ENS or an intelligent optimizer complete with garbage collection? Prior to DNA testing & genetic science in general the bulk of the geological evidence supported the random generator function. Now it's not completely random because it does have survival instincts serving as part of it's domain, but it's still a random function to produce it's range of mutation. Well at least that's the theory. But recent geological evidence when put under the scrutiny of DNA testing & genetic science in general is weakening that idea. Juggs...please, I'm going to chime in on the recent discussion here...WHAT EVIDENCE? The last time we had one of these discussions, I got you to admit your source on how humanity was a "special species" or whatever it was your term was...you pointed to a guy at U of Chicago who's work actually was in direct contradiction with your claim. You claimed his work showed that in human evolution, somehow mutation rates were much faster than in most species and thus humanity showed design through that difference, and this was in fact the opposite of what his papers said. His papers said that random mutation proceded at basically the same rate in human evolution as in most other equally complex species, but that there was a very strong selective pressure towards higher cognitive functions - meaning new genes were not appearing at any sort of accelerated rate, but when they did appear, if beneficial in certain ways, they were adopted very rapidly due to a vastly increased chance of survival. Basically, exactly what Evolution by Natural Selection would predict if there was a strong pressure towards a trait. This was in stark contrast with what you were claiming the writer's worko actually said. Now, you refer to "recent geological evidence when put under the scrutiny of DNA testing & genetic science". I actually am a geologist. I know a fair bit about geobiology. I've been to talks, read papers, and know some pretty damn good geobiologists. Several are on this floor with me. None of them to my knowledge know of any of this evidence that somewhere out there evidence has been provided which suggests against the random generation of mutation as the cause of variation. None of my readings, knowledge, or lectures have proven that either. So, it's time for you to tell us what your sources for this claim are. Specific papers which back up your conclusions. It is totally impossible to evaluate any of your claims without citations, so please provide some.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 11:08 AM) I still can't see what all the fuss is about! I really wish the real facts would come out, damned or be damned. The ONLY way you're going to get that right now seems to be a special prosecutor. Gonzalez is not going to tell the truth and the white house is not going to hand over documents if the Republicans won't make them testify under oath with the threat of perjury charges and subpoena power over documents. They've proven for 3 years, and they're proving again today, that they're more interested in protecting the White House than almost anything else, because if they lose the White House, they lose the ability to slide in all of their little pet projects and so forth.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 10:16 AM) I give the media credit, I have heard the words "horrible officiating" and "fix" A LOT more than I thought I would today. That game was VERY suspecious and I'm glad people are talking about it. I'm still against the idea of a "fix", but I think it's very hard to deny horrible officiating when some 90 million Americans are watching.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 09:46 AM) Yeah, but think about it. What does it say when the six seed in one conference beats the one seed in the other? We all know that the AFC is a whole lot tougher than the NFC, and this just seems like another way of showing it. It says that the AFC was the one bribing the refs?

ESPN is supposedly flipping their front page to feature the bad officiating by the bottom of the hour.

Well, the Republicans here will be happy to know that despite the fact that Specter says he thinks the program was illegal and the fact that he's holding those hearings, he's already doing everything he can to make sure nothing actually happens because of them. He's first of all prevented the Attorney General from having to testify under oath, the obvious reprocussion of which is that if he chooses to lie to the committee, there's not a damn thing they can do about it, and he's also preventing video of previous statements by the President and AG from being shown (they have the transcripts, but video always works vastly better in a TV world as you know.)

I won't rule it out as possible like I will with the Royals, and anything can happen - Bonderman and Rogers could suddenly turn into the best 1-2 pitching combo in baseball, and Ordonez could stay healthy for a full season and show no signs of previous injuries, and Ivan Rodriguez could suddenly regain those 30 pounds he lost coming into last year, and Percival and Todd Jones could suddenly both have amazing and healthy seasons, and all their young guys could play above their heads, etc. It will take a lot going right for the Twins to be able to challenge for that division. It would take even more going right for the Tigers to do so. Never rule anything out in baseball...but it's just not something I'd call likely.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 6, 2006 -> 07:09 AM) There truly is nothing like comparing the stats of injury-shortened seasons. Or from a guy who only spent 34 at bats in the big leagues, against some dang good pitching too.